Originally posted by reh321 Having worked in R&D much of my career, I keep putting myself in the place of the engineers. My belief, yes I have no evidence, is that they have changed direction several times, and never gotten to the point of having a product ready for production. I believe that is why what we hear about "K-3ii replacement" changes from show to show.
Guesses:
1. I
think the product planners thought for a while the K-1 would be the flagship, K-70 the entry and KP the enthusiast camera.
2. I
think they had stopped development of an APSc flagship after they finished K-3ll and did the K-1 (fairly rapidly)
3. I
think they were surprised by the (fairly negative) customer response to the KP as ‘not a flagship’ despite the fact that it is a fine camera.
4. I
think they then decided to do a ‘clean sheet’ design for APSc that once and for all solves some of the major Pentax perceived weaknesses, knowing new technology can be shared across at least three platforms.
- Autofocus - the MZ-S used SAFOX!! (New PDAF sensor if PDAF is the decision)
- Video - I don’t think they have the video code to use the newest Milbeaut image processors
- Speed - bus, buffer, processor, throughout - the whole deal.
Clean sheet might mean Samsung, which by itself would account for the delay, but they’d be trashing all their Sony code if they went to Samsung, so I think it not likely.
Pentax has a history of once a (platform) generation introducing something (r)evolutionary. K10D shocked the industry, for instance. I think MILC will show up in 645 first as a large sensor body.
5. I
think they’re going to do something Pentaxy-novel and groundbreaking, such as a hybrid viewfinder or hybrid AF. Something that proves the statement ‘worth waiting for’.
Last edited by monochrome; 03-02-2019 at 11:15 AM.